Nor has Mr. Dickens the easy and various sagacity which, as has been
said, gives a unity to all which it touches. He has, indeed, a quality
which is near allied to it in appearance. His shrewdness in some things,
especially in traits and small things, is wonderful. His works are
full of acute remarks on petty doings, and well exemplify the telling
power of minute circumstantiality. But the minor species of perceptive
sharpness is so different from diffused sagacity, that the two scarcely
ever are to be found in the same mind. There is nothing less like the
great lawyer, acquainted with broad principles and applying them with
distinct deduction, than the attorney’s clerk who catches at small points
like a dog biting at flies. ‘Over-sharpness’ in the student is the most
unpromising symptom of the logical jurist. You must not ask a horse in
blinkers for a large view of a landscape. In the same way, a detective
ingenuity in microscopic detail is of all mental qualities most unlike
the broad sagacity by which the great painters of human affairs have
unintentionally stamped the mark of unity on their productions. They show
by their treatment of each case that they understand the whole of life;
the special delineator of fragments and points shows that he understands
them only. In one respect the defect is more striking in Mr. Dickens than
in any other novelist of the present day. The most remarkable deficiency
in modern fiction is its omission of the business of life, of all those
countless occupations, pursuits, and callings in which most men live and
move, and by which they have their being. In most novels money _grows_.
You have no idea of the toil, the patience, and the wearing anxiety by
which men of action provide for the day, and lay up for the future,
and support those that are given into their care. Mr. Dickens is not
chargeable with this omission. He perpetually deals with the pecuniary
part of life. Almost all his characters have determined occupations, of
which he is apt to talk even at too much length. When he rises from the
toiling to the luxurious classes, his genius in most cases deserts him.
The delicate refinement and discriminating taste of the idling orders
are not in his way; he knows the dry arches of London Bridge better than
Belgravia. He excels in inventories of poor furniture, and is learned in
pawnbrokers’ tickets. But, although his creative power lives and works
among the middle class and industrial section of English society, he has
never painted the highest part of their daily intellectual life. He made,
indeed, an attempt to paint specimens of the apt and able man of business
in _Nicholas Nickleby_; but the Messrs. Cheeryble are among the stupidest
of his characters. He forgot that breadth of platitude is rather
different from breadth of sagacity. His delineations of middle-class
life have in consequence a harshness and meanness which do not belong to
that life in reality. He omits the relieving element.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account